TACKIE v. BANNERMAN

Edward Wiredu J. decided an appeal by a tenant arising out of rent-control proceedings concerning a ground-floor flat in Accra. The flat had been let in 1970 for ¢70 monthly; the landlord stated he intended to keep the property available for his children, notably his daughter, Mrs. Phillips, who trained as a dental surgeon in London and wrote letters planning to return to Ghana with her family and seeking accommodation. The landlord served three months’ notice to quit and then complained to rent officer Mr. Yaw Buadu under regulation 13(1) of L.I. 369, asserting reasonable requirement under section 17(1)(g) of the Rent Act. The rent officer dismissed the request; on appeal, rent magistrate Mr. S. A. Afful reversed, ordered possession, and awarded costs. The tenant appealed, challenging title, procedural compliance (including regulation 18), notice requirements, evidentiary rulings, and the jurisdiction of the rent officer. Wiredu J. held that title was irrelevant and regulation 18 and notice arguments failed, but ultimately allowed the appeal because rent officers lack jurisdiction over recovery of possession under Act 220, setting aside the magistrate’s order and awarding costs.